The Jews of Africa
....To complicate matters, the traditions of contemporary Africans who call themselves Jews are exceptionally diverse; even Jews in the same geographic areas express their Judaism in different ways. White South African Jews practice a familiar, European type of Judaism, replete with ornate synagogues and traditional Jewish community organizations, while their black countrymen, the Lemba, live in thatch huts in mountain villages, conjure the spirits of their ancestors during harvest festivals and practice secret rituals that induce their neighbors to accuse them of sorcery. The Abayudaya in Uganda follow most of the Rabbinical holidays and traditions, while the Ethiopian Jews take most of their rituals directly from the Old Testament. Having lived in virtual isolation on an island off the coast of Tunisia, Jews of Djerba maintain most of the practices that their Jewish ancestors did when they landed there two thousand years ago, while Moroccan Jewry has evolved over the centuries to encompass customs of the Christians, Muslims and Berbers.http://www.mindspring.com/~jaypsand/index.htm

The Lemba of Southern Africa
The Lemba people, is actually an ethnic group in Southern Africa with Jewish origins, which migrated from Sena in Yemen where they lived having migrated from Palestine. The Lemba, a Bantu-speaking people of southern Africa, have a tradition that they were led out of Judea by a man named Buba. They practice circumcision, keep one day a week holy and avoid eating pork or pig-like animals, such as the hippopotamus.
A team of geneticists has found that many chromosome a set of DNA sequences that is distinctive of the cohanim, the Jewish priests believed to be the descendants of Aaron. The genetic signature of priests - a hereditary caste, with certain ritual roles - is particularly common among Lemba men who belong to the senior of their 12 groups, known as the Buba clan.
The discovery of the Lemba's Jewish ancestry by the West has come about through the intertwining of two unusual strands of inquiry. One was developed by geneticists in the United States, Israel and England who wondered what truth there might be to the Jewish tradition that priests are the descendants of Aaron, the elder brother of Moses.
The Lemba - http://www.haruth.com/JewsLemba.html

Ethiopia
Ethiopian Jewry represents one of the oldest Diaspora communities.3 According to one theory, Ethiopian Jewry had its origin in Jewish soldiers stationed in Ethiopia, who married local women and converted the people to Judaism. Another tradition holds that one of King Solomon's sons arrived in Ethiopia with his retainers and settled there.http://www.colorq.org/MeltingPot/Africa/AfricanJews.htm

The Jews of Africa
....To complicate matters, the traditions of contemporary Africans who call themselves Jews are exceptionally diverse; even Jews in the same geographic areas express their Judaism in different ways. White South African Jews practice a familiar, European type of Judaism, replete with ornate synagogues and traditional Jewish community organizations, while their black countrymen, the Lemba, live in thatch huts in mountain villages, conjure the spirits of their ancestors during harvest festivals and practice secret rituals that induce their neighbors to accuse them of sorcery. The Abayudaya in Uganda follow most of the Rabbinical holidays and traditions, while the Ethiopian Jews take most of their rituals directly from the Old Testament. Having lived in virtual isolation on an island off the coast of Tunisia, Jews of Djerba maintain most of the practices that their Jewish ancestors did when they landed there two thousand years ago, while Moroccan Jewry has evolved over the centuries to encompass customs of the Christians, Muslims and Berbers.http://www.mindspring.com/~jaypsand/index.htm

The Lemba of Southern Africa
The Lemba people, is actually an ethnic group in Southern Africa with Jewish origins, which migrated from Sena in Yemen where they lived having migrated from Palestine. The Lemba, a Bantu-speaking people of southern Africa, have a tradition that they were led out of Judea by a man named Buba. They practice circumcision, keep one day a week holy and avoid eating pork or pig-like animals, such as the hippopotamus.
A team of geneticists has found that many chromosome a set of DNA sequences that is distinctive of the cohanim, the Jewish priests believed to be the descendants of Aaron. The genetic signature of priests - a hereditary caste, with certain ritual roles - is particularly common among Lemba men who belong to the senior of their 12 groups, known as the Buba clan.
The discovery of the Lemba's Jewish ancestry by the West has come about through the intertwining of two unusual strands of inquiry. One was developed by geneticists in the United States, Israel and England who wondered what truth there might be to the Jewish tradition that priests are the descendants of Aaron, the elder brother of Moses.
The Lemba - http://www.haruth.com/JewsLemba.html

Ethiopia
Ethiopian Jewry represents one of the oldest Diaspora communities.3 According to one theory, Ethiopian Jewry had its origin in Jewish soldiers stationed in Ethiopia, who married local women and converted the people to Judaism. Another tradition holds that one of King Solomon's sons arrived in Ethiopia with his retainers and settled there.http://www.colorq.org/MeltingPot/Africa/AfricanJews.htm

Good question, do black Jews have white jewish ancestors or are the white jews today descendance of original black jews....
This issues can only be solved by identifying the ethnic identity of the original Jews or Hebrews.

Here is a piece you might find interesting -

My understanding has shown me that Egyptian Civilization is the mother of all civilizations, and Judeo-Christian civilization in particular owe a great deal of its history and beliefs to Egypt. In my opinion Judeo-Christian theologians and Eurocentric historians have deliberately distorted Egyptian role in Judeo- Christian faiths and history as part of their Anti-African racists attitude. I don’t think it is by chance that historians and religious scholars, ignore the African origins of major Western Religions, Judaism and Christianity.

-For example the so called 10 commandments that Moses is supposed to have gotten from God, are actually extracts from the “Negative affirmations of Maat” from Egypt (Kemet), Abraham was not the first man to talk about a monotheistic God but an Egyptian called Akhenaten.

- The teachings of the Nile Valley Africans’ Mysteries System of the Grand Lodge of Luxor taught that “In the beginning was the Word”, this biblical concept was uttered by by the Africans who worshipped the God- RA, AMEN-RA (which you say at the end of every prayer, you are still praying to the African God Amen), PTAH-RA, for thousands upon thousands of years before there was a Hebrew God named YWH (Jehovah). This said teaching is still present in the ‘Egyptian Book of the Dead and the Papyrus of Ani’.

The “Beginning of all Things” in Genesis and the theory of man’s origin is stated in the Egyptian “Book of the coming forth by Day and by Night”, and was at least before the 1st Dynasty (4100 B.C.E), which preceded the arrival of the first non-indigenous invaders of Egypt….the “Hyksos or Shepherd Kings of Beduina”, all of this when Egypt was called “TA-Merry, Kimit, Kamt etc. This was 2825 years before Moses developed his story about Noad and the Great Flood.

One has to be totally fanatically biased not to recognize Moses attempt at detailing the teachings he learnt as an “initiate” in the Mystery System at the Grand Luxor (Thebes). For it would have been impossible for Moses, or anyone else in Egypt at that period, to have raised to one of the highest rank in the government of Pharaoh Rameses II’s inner circle (cabinet) and was not himself in the religious rites of the Mysteries under the priests of the religion of God- Amen-Ra.

About the Exodus story of Moses parting the waters of Red Sea with his rod, there is another similar story of ancient African, much older than than Moses’ story. A king of the Kenda people of Central Africa along the Great Lakes, “…caused the wters of Lake Tanganyika to part when he raised his staff and purposefully dropped it on the ground…” The story goes on to show that when the king and his own soldiers crossed the Waters” of Lake Tanganyika, he once more dropped his “…magical wand..” and “..the waters came together and drowned all of the enemies…”

The 10 commandments came from the ‘Negative Commandments’ which were recited in the ‘Hall of MAAT’ in order to recapture life after death. Creation, Fall, Judgment, Resurrection, Virgin birth of a messiah, trinity- all these stories have African origins. Even some of the so-called “Proverbs of King Solomon” have their origin in the African “Teachings of Amen-Em-Eope”.

For example:

Proverbs xxii : 17, xxiii : 14 (Israel – Asia Minor) –

“1a. Incline thine ear, and hear my words,
And apply thine heart to apprehend; For it is pleasant if thou keep them in thy belly,
That they may be fixed like a peg upon thy lips.”
2a. Have I not written for thee thirty saying …..
3a. Rob not the poor for he is poor, Niether oppress the lowly in the gate.

The Teachings of Amen-em-eope (Egypt –Northeast Alkebu-lan) –

“1. Give thine ear, and hear what I say,
And apply thine heart to apprehend; It is good for thee to place them in thine heart,
Let them rest in the casket of thy belly.
That they may act as a peg upon thy tongue.”
2. Consider these thirty chapters, …..
3. Beware of robbing the poor, And of oppressing the afflicted.

The entire ‘Five Books of Moses’ represent a one-sided report by people who were the “complainants, witnesses, prosecutors, judges, jurors,” and even the only “chosen people of God,” all of them on the side of the so-called “Israelites,”.

Scholars’ Analysis (Including Jewish Scholars)

1. The Secret Origins of the Bible - by Tim Callahan-

“The Bible may contain the greatest story ever told, but as Callahan so brilliantly reveals, the greatest secret of all is that the story is not original. All the major stories in the Bible have historical antecedents that can be traced back to very non-divinely produced works by other cultures in earlier times. This book shakes fundamentalist beliefs about the Bible to the core.”

2. Did Moses really exist and did the Exodus ever take place? - by David Voron (Jewish writer)

Let's start with the prequel to the Exodus, the story of Joseph and hisfamily. Excavations in the eastern delta of the Nile have revealed a gradualincrease in Canaanite pottery, architecture, and tombs, beginning about 1800 B.C, thesefindings are broadly consistent with the tale of Joseph, the visits of his
family to Egypt, and their eventual settlement there.Archaeologists haveidentified the site of Avaris, the Egyptian city of that period that was thecapital of a people known as the Hyskos, a name which translates from the Egyptianas "rulers of foreign land." Inscriptions and seals bearing the names ofHyskos kings indicate that they were Canaanites. Although the Egyptian historianManetho, writing in about 300 B.C. from an Egyptian perspective, asserts thatEgypt was brutally invaded by the Hyskos, archaeologists believe the takeoverwas peaceful. However, the forceful expulsion of the Hyskos as described byManetho is supported by other archaeological and historical sources. The mostreliable evidence, according to Redford, suggests that Pharaoh Ahmose and hisforces attacked and defeated the Hyskos in Avaris, and chased them out of Egyptinto southern Canaan in 1570 B.C.

The Roman-Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, citing Manetho, equates theexpulsion of the Hyskos from Egypt with the Exodus….

TheBook of Exodus states that Hebrew slaves built the city of Pi Ramses ("House ofRamses"). According to Egyptian sources, the city was built during the reignof Ramses II, who ruled 1279-1213 B.C. In other words, the Biblical Exoduswould have had to have taken place 300 years after the expulsion of the Hyskos. Ofcourse there is also no evidence that the Hyskos were ever enslaved--or evenHebrews. Again quoting Abba Eban, "few modern scholars would go so far as toassert that the Hebrews and the Hyskos were the same people." If the Hyskoswere not the Hebrews, what then, is the earliest non-Biblical reference tothis people?

Israel Finkelstein, director of the Institute of Archaeology
at Tel Aviv University, and his colleague Neal Silberman, in their book TheBible Unearthed: "We have no clue, not even a single word, about early Israelitesin Egypt: Neither in monumental inscriptions on walls of temples, nor in tombinscriptions, nor in papyri." Similarly, William Dever, professor of NearEastern archaeology and anthropology at the University of Arizona, states inWho Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come From?: "no Egyptian textever found contains a single reference to 'Hebrews' or 'Israelites' in Egypt,much less to an 'Exodus.'" The ancient Egyptians were such compulsivechroniclers, albeit biased, that it is inconceivable that they would not record anyversion of an event as momentous as the Biblical Exodus. We should at leastexpect some self-serving or biased accounts of this extraordinary event, butthere is absolutely no reference to any exodus of Hebrew slaves in thevoluminous Egyptian writings.

According to Redford, the memories of the Canaanite Hyskos ruling Egypt andsubsequently being driven out (though not enslaved and not Hebrew) most likelyformed the basis for the Exodus story. The sequence of plagues in theExodus may be related to the ancient Egyptian belief that the inability to worshipmultiple gods causes illness. The Amarna tablets indicate that Akhnatenimposed monotheism on polytheistic Egypt during his reign between 1372 and 1354B.C., allegedly causing the populace to suffer a variety of maladies, whichabated with the restoration of polytheism by Akhnaten's successor. JonathanKirsh notes that the basket-in-the-bullrushes infant-Moses story is clearly a"cut-and-paste" plagiarism copied almost verbatim from a Mesopotamian text. In the words of Daniel Lazare, the stories of infant Moses, the plagues,and final exodus are "unconnected folktales," linked together "like pearls on astring." What we have, according to David Denby, is a "self-confirming,self-glorifying myth of origins," with Moses as "the hero of the greatestcampfire story ever told."

3. The Bible And Christianity - The Historical Origins – by Scott Bidstrup

To really understand the Bible and what it intends to say to present generations, it is necessary to understand who wrote it and why, and the cultural context in which it was written. The story is an interesting one, in no small part because the story is so much messier than most of its advocates would have you to believe.

The overriding theme of the Bible storylines is the theme of cultural conquest. Conquest by the Hebrews over their enemy neighbors, culturally by the Jews over the Israelites (used here to mean members of the ten "lost" tribes), the Christians over the Jews, the Catholics over the Gnostics, Marcionites, and other pre-Catholic factions, and on and on. In some cases, the conquest is recorded as a historical, often military event. In others, it merely is recorded as a change in content and context, an alteration of the storyline and outlook and worldview.

The history of Egypt in this period is well documented, there is no evidence from the records of Egypt itself that the events of Exodus ever occurred, either archaeologically or documentarily in the manner in which the Bible describes the events. The reality is that if a series of plagues had been visited upon Egypt, thousands of slaves escaped in a mass runaway, and the army of the Pharaoh were swallowed up by the Red Sea, such events would doubtless have made it into the Egyptian documentary record. But the reality is that there isn't a single word describing any such events.

Instead, what we do have from Egyptian sources is a remarkably different story of the Exodus. From about the beginning of the second millennium B.C.E., through about 1200 B.C.E., Egypt ruled the region known today as Palestine. How do we know this? We know it not only from Egyptian records themselves, which talk about tribute taken from the various towns and cities in Canaan, but from archaeological evidence within the region itself, which shows a number of settlements which were clearly Egyptian military outposts.

So many of the "Hebrews" (culturally indistinct from the Canaanites at this time), who were citizens of Egypt, fled to the Nile delta. time and again. Every time there was a famine in Judah, Israel or Canaan, refugees headed for Egypt. The event was so common, and the refugees so numerous, that they eventually became a substantial minority group, influential in Egypt, where they were known as the Hyksos, as is now very clear from the archaeological record.

The story of the expulsion of the Hyksos is easily the closest parallel we have from either the Egyptian record or the archaeological record to the story of the Exodus as recorded in the Bible. There are problems, though. Besides the Exodus story line, the biggest problem is the dates: the Bible places the Exodus at about 1200 B.C.E., yet the story of the Hyksos culminates in 1570 B.C.E. It is quite likely that the story of the Hyksos is the story that eventually, through generations of revisionistic retelling, became the myth of the Exodus -- another example of history being rewritten to flatter the storytellers rather than to record the unvarnished truth.

Anyway, the Hyksos grew in influence until they eventually took control of Egypt, which they ruled, with considerable cruelty and tyranny during the Fifteenth Dynasty, beginning in 1670 B.C.E. The Egyptians had finally had enough, though, and rebelled against the rule of the Hyksos and drove them out a century later in 1570 B.C.E. They weren't just driven out, either; the Egyptians pushed them back into Canaan with considerable force, driving them all the way to the Syrian frontier, sacking and burning Canaanite cities along the way. Sometime later, the Hyksos capital in Egypt, Avaris, in the eastern Nile delta, was razed to the ground by the Pharoah Ahmose, who chased the last remnants of the Hyksos back into Canaan and even laid siege to Sharuhen, the main Canaanite citadel, destroying it and ending Canaanite influence there. At least one historian claims (a millennium after the fact) that the Hyksos refugees settled in Jerusalem and built a temple there, but the archaeological record does not support the claim of either a temple or large numbers of refugees in Jerusalem from this period.

It is quite clear from the archaeological record, as well, that there never was a "wandering in the desert for 40 years," either. Extensive archaeological surveys of the Sanai desert have never shown any encampments dating from the time of the Exodus, either before, during or after the time of the Ramsean pharoahs. At least two sites mentioned in the exodus story have been positively identified and carefully and extensively excavated, but no evidence of late bronze-age occupation or encampment has been found at either site. Additionally, the Sanai Desert was literally dotted with Egyptian military outposts, and nowhere in the Sanai could the Hebrews have been more than a day's travel from one of them. It is inconceivable that they could have remained undetected in the Sanai for forty years. The story of the Exodus is clearly mythmaking designed to portray a possible forced expulsion of oppressors as an escape of victims.

By the 12th century B.C.E., the Hebrews assumed an identity unique enough in the archaeological record to become discernible for the first time. In the mountains and plateaus of the northern highlands of Canaan, from Jerusalem north to the Jezreel Valley, the highland settlements, poor for their day, begin to show a single distinguishing feature from other, similar highland settlements in regions around them. There is little to go on - pottery shows an impoverished lifestyle, with little decoration and use other than as storage and cooking vessels. Yet one thing is clear - the bones of pigs become absent from the archaeological record. The prohibition on eating pork is therefore the oldest archaeologically supported feature of Jewish culture. It is representative of the beginnings of the transformation of the god "El" into "El-ohim," the god of gods, the god of Israel. http://www.bidstrup.com/bible.htm

The Bible: - I was to find in my studies that the sacred books that make up the anthology modern scholars call the Hebrew Bible - and Christians call the Old Testament - developed over roughly a millennium; the oldest texts appear to come from the eleventh or tenth centuries BCE. The Hebrew Bible, written over a period of more than 500 years, consists of many types of literature and reflects varying points of view. The Bible has undergone substantial changes with regard to its early manuscripts and their translated versions. This Book is a collection of various materials and the worst part is the crude 'editing' where the joints are much in evidence. Gathering and the codification, giving the final written form, of the Books of the Bible took centuries. It uses descriptive methods. Its language is abstract, very rich in images. The smallest or shortest of reports turns into a story in the Bible, full of puzzling descriptions whose ambiguity is intentional. There's no getting away from the fact that the Bible is a very human book. It was not written by God, it was not edited by God, it was not translated by God. In the beginning it wasn't written down at all. Most parts of the Bible started life as sayings or stories that were handed down from generation to generation as part of an oral tradition and doubtless became altered, adulterated, and embellished in the process. Eventually they got written down, which tended to fix them a bit more, but before the invention of printing they were handed on by being copied out, and inevitably mistakes were made. And when they were translated from the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, they suffered still further alteration because translation can never be exact. Yet the Bible is essentially a religious book, but, unlike most ancient religious books, the Old Testament is characterized by a strong sense of history; even laws and exhortations are woven into the narratives.

The David and Solomon eras are periods curiously missing from the archaeological record of the region where one should expect to find archeological evidence as to its existence! Quoting from the book, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, "The Bible is the only written source concerning the United Monarchy, and it is therefore the basis of any historical presentation of the period" (Mazar, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, 369). There is such a complete void of external sources that the archaeologist, author and leading authority on the era, Donald Redford, writes in frustration that "such topics as the foreign policy of David and Solomon, Solomon's trade in horses or his marriage to Pharaoh's daughter must remain themes for midrash and fictional treatment" (Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times, 310).

Answer for yourself: Don't you find it rather interesting and a matter of concern that archaeology has confirmed the reigns of all other great kings of the ancient world mentioned in the Bible, and some of the later, lesser kings of of Judah and Israel (namely, Omri, Ahab, Jehu, Pekah, Hosea, Ahaz, Hezekiah, Mannasseh, and Uzziah) but cannot confirm the Kingship of David or Solomon?

Of course when questioned about this inconsistency typical Christian and Jewish responses vary around the conservative response that it is only a matter of time before concrete evidence of the reigns of David and Solomon will be found as well.

I am here to inform the reader that such evidence does already exits but as you will find it won't be found in Palestine but in Egypt and in a different era. Concrete evidence for David and Solomon already exists, and comes from the very place one would least expect to find it; namely Egypt. Of course we don't find the names "David" or "Solomon" but we do find the same exploits described in the Hebrew texts accredited to Thutmose III and Amenhotep III. Now we will find that that neither this "King David" or "King Solomon" were Hebrews for they were Egyptian Pharoahs but the son of this "King Solomon/Amenhotep III" with the daugher of Joseph (Tiye) will have Hebrew blood in him. This son will later be Pharoah of Egypt and lead this great Exodus. We will see that in time.

Our study will be begin with the examination of King David and progress until we are centered on the very important 18th dynasty of Egypt. At the end of the 18th dynasty (after Hatshepsut and 4 other pharaohs) there reigned a strange pharaoh named Amenophis IV, who later called himself Akhenaten. Amenhotep IV was a pharaoh so revolutionary, so radical that those following him had his name which he changed to Akhenaten and face deleted from the Egyptian records so completely that only 3000 years later did archaeology rediscover his new royal capital at Akhet-Aten (modern el-Amarna). The story of Akhenaten is all through the first five books in the Jewish-Christian Bible but due to revisionism we don't recognize him. He is the Biblical Moses and I will present evidence to show that this is a fact. This amazing and courageous Pharaoh worshipped only one god whom he called Aten (the sun disk), and founded a new capital, Akhet-Aten (Horizon of Aten), today called Tell el Amarna. This period is called the Amarna period in Egyptian history. Countless books have been written about Akhenaten but few have put together key pieces of Egyptian and Biblical History together correctly as I hope to reveal to the reader. Of course the point of such study is to see the unbelievable knowledge that Egypt possessed about the God of the Cosmos and their unique and deep understanding of this God and his workings in the Cosmos and its ultimate meaning for mankind. At the same time we will focus upon the efforts of Akhenaton, the Biblical Moses, to bring a religious revolution to bear on his nation who had at his time fallen into the deception of the worship of the "God-man" Osiris which is so similar to the same sin of idolatry which is attached to the worship of the Christian God-man Jesus Christ. The startling ramifications of such a deception, both back then and now, will become evident the more we study. At the crux of this whole study is the growing understanding and revelation that if Moses, the Egyptian Akhenaton, lived today he would oppose such worship of the post-Nicean "God-man" Jesus created by Rome.

It did not take me long to recognize the more I studied Egyptian history and religion that there exists a unique link and relationship between Akhenaten's monotheism and Jewish monotheism that does not exist in Christianity. There had to be a link between the two and my efforts at continued in-depth study revealed to me in time this very important connection between the Egyptian Pharaohs and the Biblical Patriarchs and later Jewish leaders like King David and King Solomon

TRACING THE HEBREW PHARAOHS OF EGYPT...WHO WAS THIS KING SOLOMON?
In article #2 dealing with the Biblical King David we saw a preponderance of evidence that teaches us that King David of the Old Testament is the historical Pharaoh Thutmose III.

Answer for yourself: If King David is to be properly identified as an adaptation of the Pharaoh Thutmose III, then should we not expect that from through his loins, one way or the other, would come one whom we know today as King Solomon? Should we expect that he should also be a Pharaoh and also be found in Egypt?

Our study will focus on the most important Pharaohs of the 18th dynasty:

Ahmose
Amenhotep I
Thutmose I
Thutmose II
Hatshepsut
Thutmose III (King David)
Amenhotep II
Thutmose IV
Amenhotep III (King Solomon)
Amenhotep IV (Akhenaten-Moses)
Neferneferuaten
Tutankhamen
Ay
Horemheb
Answer for yourself: Did you notice that out beside three names of these 18th Dynasty Pharaohs are the more familiar Biblical names of familiar Jewish heroes and Kings? What could we possibly mean by that? Have we lost our mind at Bet Emet Ministries? Are we insinuating that the real identities of these Biblical characters are possibly Egyptian Pharaohs? Yes that is exactly what we are saying and we have the evidence to prove such an identification as you will see if you continue to study.

You should have noticed one other thing that is quite startling considering what we have been taught by the Old Testament. It must be said at the beginning that the chronology of the Bible represents Solomon as the son of King David. However when we get to Egypt we see that the Biblical chronology is questionable due to highly detailed and accurate Egyptian records and as you study you will see this for yourself. As our study progresses and the evidence mounts that the King Solomon of the Bible is in reality Amenhotep III; the great-grandson of King David (Tuthmose III). We will also begin to notice that unlike what we have led to believe; for example, that King Solomon is the son of King David, such is not the truth. We will find that King Solomon is not the son but rather the great-grandson of Tuthmose III (King David of the Bible).

Answer for yourself: So what is the truth? Well let us doour study and examine the historical evidence and and assorted historical facts we find outside the Old Testament and then you will see quite clearly which is true and let me give you a hint...it is not the Biblical account. Now on with the study. What we will find is that by marrying Tiye, the daughter of Yuya (the Biblical Joseph) and his wife who was the daughter of the priest of Heliopolis, we see that Tiye was half Hebrew. Amenhotep III, the Biblical King Solomon, by marrying Tiye thus "re-establishes the connection of the Jews with the Egyptian line when Sarah and Abraham has left Egypt and when Sarah gave birth to Isaac, the son of Tuthmose III (the Biblical King David). Tiye's father, Yuya, the Biblical Joseph, had been commander of the chariotry under Tuthmose IV (Cyril Aldred, Cyril, Akhenaten: King of Egypt, 1987). Tiye's features and dark skin as represented in artwork from the time indicate African origins and attest to the the racial color of the Egyptians whom the Biblical Joseph marries. This begins the "black skinned" Jewish race which many historians are amiss to attest. To inherit the throne, however, Amenhotep III (the Biblical Solomon) had to have a royal Egyptian wife. Thus he also marries his sister Sitamun, (thus explaining the Bible's reference to his marrying an Egyptian princess, whereas as King of Israel, it would have been impossible). By Amenhotep III, Tiye had at least six children. She had two sons (Tuthmose V and Amenhotep IV, the secondof whom went on to become pharaoh and is better known today as the Biblical Moses. Let us not forget that Tiye, as seen in the above picture with her husband Amenhotep III (the Biblical Solomon) was a girl of common birth from her Hebrew father Joseph (Yuya) but yet history records here as a person of very strong character. Evident from records, she was a beautiful young Black queen. A woman of great intellect, ability, and a powerful influence. She shared the crown with her husband Amenhotep III (the Biblical Solomon) as though she had been its lineal heiress. Queen Tiye had such an important part in the affairs of Egypt, that foreign diplomats often appealed directly to her in matters affecting certain international relations. Make no mistake about it; Queen Tiye was a full-blooded African. Her son, Akhenaton (the Biblical Moses) and his wife, Nefertiti are the parents of King Tutankhamen, who is also known as "King Tut." From Akhenaton on down to the end of the 18 Dynasty we find the Hebrew Pharaohs that came from the marriage of Amenhotep III and the daughter of Joseph:

Akhenaton (the Biblical Moses)
Smenkhkare (the brother of Moses)
Tutankhamen (the son of Moses)
Ay (the Biblical Ephraim)
The Hebrew Old Testament contains a lot of information about King Solomon. Much of it is true and some is not. In the Hebrew Scriptures it is said of King Solomon:

Solomon inherited a enormous empire conquered by his father King David that extended from the Nile in Egypt to the Euphrates River in Mesopotamia;
I Kings 4:21 21 And Solomon reigned over all kingdoms from the river unto the land of the Philistines, and unto the border of Egypt: they brought presents, and served Solomon all the days of his life. (KJV)

Answer for yourself: If we can prove that King Solomon is a Pharaoh then what does that say about about the same promise made earlier to the Hebrew "Patriarchs"; for example the one which we find in Gen 15:18 which was made to Abraham?

Gen. 15: 18 18 In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates: (KJV)

Answer for yourself: Could Abraham have been a Pharaoh and we not know it? Would this explain why Josephus writes that Abraham had 318 "officers" indicating an vast army of legions when the inherited Hebrew Texts given us by Ezra says "318 servants"? Did Ezra cover this up? I again refer you to article #2 to begin to see the truth about Ezra. Now let us look at more of the "same" promises in the Hebrew Texts and to "whom" they were made.

Deut 1:6-7 6 The LORD our God spake unto us in Horeb, saying, Ye have dwelt long enough in this mount: 7 Turn you, and take your journey, and go to the mount of the Amorites, and unto all the places nigh thereunto, in the plain, in the hills, and in the vale, and in the south, and by the sea side, to the land of the Canaanites, and unto Lebanon, unto the great river, the river Euphrates. (KJV)

Answer for yourself: Where did Moses get the authority to promise this land which was owned by Egypt to these "fleeing" Hebrews? Could it have been that Moses was a Pharaoh and we not know it?

Josh 1:1-4 1 Now after the death of Moses the servant of the LORD it came to pass, that the LORD spake unto Joshua the son of Nun, Moses' minister, saying, 2 Moses my servant is dead; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel. 3 Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, that have I given unto you, as I said unto Moses. 4 From the wilderness and this Lebanon even unto the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites, and unto the great sea toward the going down of the sun, shall be your coast. (KJV)

Answer for yourself: Where did Joshua get the authority to promise this land which was owned by Egypt to these "fleeing" Hebrews? Could it have been that Joshua also was a Pharaoh and we not know it?

2 Sam 8:1-3 1 And after this it came to pass, that David smote the Philistines, and subdued them: and David took Metheg'ammah out of the hand of the Philistines. 2 And he smote Moab, and measured them with a line, casting them down to the ground; even with two lines measured he to put to death, and with one full line to keep alive. And so the Moabites became David's servants, and brought gifts. 3 David smote also Hadadezer, the son of Rehob, king of Zobah, as he went to recover his border at the river Euphrates. (KJV)

Answer for yourself: Where did King David get the ownership of this Egyptian land? Could King David have been a Pharaoh? Well we saw that he was in article #2. That determination is not hard for you now once reading article #2. We will deal with these other Patriarchs in future articles. Now let us get back to Solomon.

The Hebrew Scriptures teach us that King Solomon accumulated great wealth and wisdom.

23 So king Solomon exceeded all the kings of the earth in riches and in wisdom. (1917 Tanakh)

The Hebrew Scriptures teach us that King Solomon administered his kingdom through a system of 12 districts (1 Kings 4:7).
7 And Solomon had twelve officers over all Israel, who provided victuals for the king and his household: each man had to make provision for a month in the year.

The Hebrew Scriptures teach us that King Solomon possessed a large harem, which included "the daughter of Pharaoh"
1 ¶ And Solomon became allied to Pharaoh king of Egypt by marriage, and took Pharaoh's daughter, and brought her into the city of David, until he had made an end of building his own house, and the house of the LORD, and the wall of Jerusalem round about (I Kings 3:1)

1 ¶ Now king Solomon loved many foreign women, besides the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites; (I Kings. 11:1)

3 And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines; and his wives turned away his heart. (I Kings 11:3)

The Hebrew Scriptures teach us that King Solomon honored other gods in his old age:
4 For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods; and his heart was not whole with the LORD his God, as was the heart of David his father. 5 For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, and after Milcom the detestation of the Ammonites. (I Kings 11:4-5).

The Hebrew Scriptures teach us that King Solomon was a master builder who created buildings of royal proportions like the Egyptians. He built "the house of the Lord, and his own house as we know. devoted his reign to great building projects;
15 ¶ And this is the account of the levy which king Solomon raised; to build the house of the LORD, and his own house, and Millo, and the wall of Jerusalem, and Hazor, and Megiddo, and Gezer. (1 Kings 9:15).

17 And Solomon built Gezer, and Beth-horon the nether, 18 and Baalath, and Tadmor in the wilderness, in the land, 19 and all the store-cities that Solomon had, and the cities for his chariots, and the cities for his horsemen, and that which Solomon desired to build for his pleasure in Jerusalem, and in Lebanon, and in all the land of his dominion. (I Kings 9:17-19).

Answer for yourself: What were some of these building accomplishments:

The Temple (I Kings 6)
The Royal Palace (I Kings 7:2-12)
The walls of Jerusalem
The millo (an eastern fill made to enlarge Jerusalem (I Kings 11:27)
The Royal Cities of Megiddo, Hazor, and Gezer,
Many garrisons and fortifications
The store cities, the cities for his horsemen and the cities for his chariots throughout his empire.
I must address the building of the Temple. Amenhotep III, the Biblical Solomon, embarked on massive building campaigns which are partly confirmed in the list in I Kings but there is a problem. This temple was built in the 14th century B.C.E. and not in the 10th century as the Bible states. The problem we find is that the palace he is supposed to have built in Jerusalem cannot be found by archeologists, but the description tallies exactly with the Amenhotep III's palace in Thebes which was built in the 14th century.

Also of importance is the fact that Amenhotep III is responsible for what we call the "12 Tribes" of Israel. Let me explain. It was he who organized Egypt into twelve administrative districts ("12 tribes"); the organization which was taken from the pattern of the Zodiac.

Answer for yourself: In reading a book entitled Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times by Redford he asks a good question so let me paraphrase it: Since archeology and history testifies to a pattern where other great Bronze and Iron Age cultures in the ancient Near East (Egyptian, Babylonian, Assyrian, and Hittite) left as a legacy numerous documents, art, and inscriptions on buildings or public monuments would should we not expect to have such testimony left by such a great king and master builder let alone by the descendants and admirers of King Solomon in order to honor him? Of course we would expect this to occur yet the hard facts of archeology and history hits us right between the eyes. No article of any king bearing the name of "King Solomon" has ever been found as of today (Ibid. p. 309) anywhere!

The cities of Hazor, Megiddo and Gezer, which as we have seen were built by King Solomon, have now been extensively excavated and all artifacts discovered examined and categorized. Hazor was a large Canaanite city state in Upper Galilee and has been identified as modern Tell el-Qedah only 14 kilometers north of the Sea of Galilee. It was one of the major commercial centres in the Fertile Cresent and we find references to it in both Egyptian and Mesopotamian texts going as far back as the eighteenth century B.C.E. Megiddo, which has been identified as modern Tell el-Mutesellim, was the largest of he ancient fortified city states in Canaan, overlooking the Jezreel Valley of Central Palestine, while Gezar, located in the foothills of the Judean Rang east of Jerusalem, was another important fortified city. A stratum containing large palaces, temples and strong fortifications was found in each of these cities. The name of Solomon, however, was not found.

Answer for yourself: Are you aware that all three of these cities were conquered by Tuthmose III (King David) in the middle of the fifteenth century B.C.E.? This has been confirmed by archeological digging , which has produced evidence of the cities' destruction in the right strata for this period (Osman, The House of the Messiah, p. 212).

Answer for yourself: Now since King Solomon is King David's grandson, and we know that King David is really Thutmose III, then should we not expect to find compelling evidence and parallels between the lives of the Biblical King Solomon and Thutmose III's grandson named Amenhotep III? We should and we do.

Answer for yourself: Are you aware that in all three cases evidence has been found of large-scale reconstruction work 50 years later during the reign of Amenhotep III (the Biblical Solomon) who was Tuthmose III's (David's) grandson?

Answer for yourself: Can you guess what of earth shattering proportions was also found in the excavations of these three cities? A cartouche containing the name not of Solomon but Amenhotep III. A Cartouche is an oval band symbolizing continuity which enclosed a god’s or Pharaoh’s name (nomen and prenomen) similar to a modern logo, and which was the symbol of an Egyptian name in hieroglyphics. A cartouche of the 18th Dynasty Pharaoh Amenhotep III, Thutmose III's grandson (King David) was found in the strata belonging to this period and nothing was found indicating a "King Solomon" had been connected with any of these 3 cities in any way whatsoever. (Osman, House of the Messiah, p. 212).

In Jerusalem, it has not been possible to excavate the temple mount, however, extensive excavations in the city, including the areas adjacent to the temple mount have not revealed the existence of a Solomaic palace complex (Osman, The House of the Messiah, p. 216). Moreover, excavation of the Millo has revealed (due to pottery found in the Millo) that its original construction was also contemporary with the Egyptian 18th Dynasty of Amenhotep III (Osman, House of the Messiah, p. 200-201; Rohl, Pharaohs and Kings, p. 181).

Amenhotep III of Egypt, Pharaoh of the Egypt's glorious 18th Dynasty, was known in ancient times as the "King of Kings" and "Ruler of Ruler's" (Redford, Akhenaten the Heretic King, p. 35). He, like the Biblical Solomon, inherited a vast empire whose influence extended quite literally from the Nile to the Euphrates (Osman, House of Messiah, p. 202). http://www.egyptcx.netfirms.com/were_there_hebrew_pharaohs_egypt_3.htm

Ancient Egypt, Nubia and the Jews

The present ethnic identity of Egypt doesn’t reflect or have anything to do with the original inhabitants of Egypt (Kemet) as much as today’s Americans reflect the ethnic identity of the original land now called America. To understand Ancient Egypt formerly called Kemet, one has to understand ancient Ethiopia and ancient Nubia because these three were interconnected.

Around 5,100 years ago, a rich and powerful nation called the kingdom of Kush (also referred to as ancient Nubia) was a center of culture and military might in Africa. Ancient Nubia had a wealth of natural resources such as gold, ivory, copper, frankincense and ebony but they also produced and traded a variety of goods such as pottery.

Ancient Nubia's lands are now part of modern Egypt and Sudan. Nubia is the homeland of Africa's earliest black culture with a history which can be traced from 3800 B.C.

The influx of Arabs to Egypt and Sudan had contributed to the suppression of the Nubian identity following the collapse of the last Nubian kingdom in 1900. A major part of the Nubian population were totally arabized or claimed to be arabs (Jaa'leen-the majority of Northern Sudanese- and some Donglawes in Sudan, Kenuz and Koreskos in Egypt). However all Nubians were converted to Islam, and Arabic language became their main media of communication in addition to their indigenous old Nubian language. The unique characteristic of Nubian is shown in their culture (dress, dances, traditions and music) as well as their indigenous language which is the common feature of all Nubians.

So it isn't because when you go to Egypt you will notice that the ancient Egyptians are shown by the artist as the ancient Nubians or Ethiopians or anybody else, except when you are talking about the conquerors. In most of these museums they purposely bring you the statues of the Greeks, of the Romans, of the Persians, the Assyrians, and the Hyksos. They don't bring you any of the Africans. So when they can't help it, and they need to bring you one that you call a typical African like Pharaoh Mentuhotep III, it is important to Egypt that they have to show him. What they did was to make his nose flat, so you can’t tell the difference.

Remember, the period of time of which we are speaking, there is no writing in Greece yet. Until Homer there is no writing in Greece. No record you could deal with. Whatever they learned, came from outside, came from Egypt, came from Babylonia. The Babylonian writings are part of this origin of Greece as well as the writings from at least 4100 B.C.E., the First Dynastic period, and this is not when writing started along the Nile. This is the First Dynasty, when Egypt reorganized herself from under two men. The war between the north, headed by King Scorpion, and the south headed by King Narmer, and that will bring us to about 4100 B.C.E. when Narmer started United or Dynastic Egypt.

So the pre-dynastic period was the period of the introduction of religion, of mathematics and science, engineering, law, medicine and so forth. The period of documentation also started then to some extent in the First Dynasty. The period of belief in "One God" really did not start with Akhnaten, that is, when somebody said there must be only "One God." But the period of absorbing "One God" didn't start then, because it is that period in 4100 B.C.E., when Narmer, after defeating Scorpion, the leader of the North, decided that the deity of the North, God Amen (which you say at the end of every prayer, you are still praying to the African God Amen), be put together with his own deity of the South, God Ra. But they didn't notice that he made "One God' out of the two, God Amen-Ra. He used them in that respect. But the people fell into civil war and there was division again. From that union, God Amen-Ra became God Ptah, and the Goddess of Justice became Maat. Justice, shown as a scale which is the same symbol now used in the United States for justice, except that there is no justice in the United States, because one scale is up, the other is down, and that is not justice; that is "just this"! Justice is when both scales are on the same level, and so the African in America who asks for justice is being foolish. The symbol says you will never get it; you'll get "just this"!

Before these symbols came the laws on morality and human behavior, the Admonitions to Goddess Maat—Goddess of Justice and Law. There were forty-two Admonitions to Goddess Maat forming the foundation of justice. Then there are the teachings of Amen-em-eope one thousand years before Solomon stole them, some of which he plagiarized word for word, and others he paraphrased, which are now called the Proverbs of Solomon. And yet if we could have stopped there we would have done enough. But it wasn't the last of it, so to speak. Because we came down with jurisprudence, the basis of law attached to the deity which we are teaching now as jurisprudence. And there is a thing in the African jurisprudence that a harborer should not get away from the penalty of the thief.

During the earliest time of the Kingdom of Ethiopia, King Uri, the first King of Ethiopia had spoken about, "justice isn't based upon strength, but on morality of the condition of the event." This now interprets as "the stronger should not mistreat the weaker"; and this is supposed to be something said by Plato, just like the nonsense we hear that "the Greeks had democracy." The Greeks have never democracy. They never had one in the past and they don't have it now. When they were supposed to have had democracy in Greece no more than five percent of the people had anything you could call democracy. When you look at that, you find it was from this background going back to the time of Amen-em-eope that theses fundamental laws came from, you could see why those laws spread from North Africa and into Numidia, which is today called Tunisia.

It is at Numidia then that Augustine's family, continuing the practice of the Manichean religion, carried it into Rome later in the Christian Era. When he left his education in Khart-Haddas or Carthage, it is that same teaching from the Manicheans that Augustine carried into Rome. Ambrose, the greatest Christian scholar in all of Europe, became stunned. But when this twenty-nine-year-old boy arrived and spoke to Ambrose about his education in Carthage, Ambrose said, "Man, you're heavy." And Augustine took over. It was the same teachings that Guido the Monk, who went to Spain in the time of the Moors, had taught at the University of Salamanca which they had established. And it was the same Manichean concept that made Augustine write against the Stoics. Augustine wrote the fundamental principle that was to govern modern Christianity in its morality, when he presented them with a book called On Christian Doctrine. He had previously written the Holy City of God. If you want to check Augustine to see if he was an indigenous African read his Confessions. There he will tell you who he was.

When Islam came it was supposed to bring something new, but I ask "what did it bring new?" Because Islam was supposed to have started with an African woman by the name Hagar, according to Islamic literature. Hagar was from Egypt, and Abraham was from Asia—the City of Ur in Chaldea. At the time of Abraham's birth a group of African people, called Elamites, were ruling. Before Abraham, the sacred river of India has been named after General Ganges, an African who came from Ethiopia. The River Ganges still carries the name of General Ganges. And I notice in India they haven't given up the symbolic worship of the cow, which represents the Worship of Goddess Het-Heru, Hathor, the "Golden Calf" of the Jews. They also haven't given up the obelisk that still stays there, which the Hindus copied. Again came an Englishman by the name of Sir Geoffrey Higgins, who published a two-volume work in 1836, and in Volume One in particular, he is speaking about all the deities of the past being "black," but said: "I can't accept that they could have come from even Egypt, they must have come from India." He couldn't accept it!

Out of that religion of the Nile Valley came the Religion of Ngail in Kenya from the same river base. And as the situation changed you had the Amazulu going for it, because the Zimbabwe river is still there. The people who were originally there were kicked off their land by the British, and equally by the Germans. When the German Dr. Carl Peters came there, the struggle between the Germans and the English for Tanganyika was going strong; both sides killed off the people around that area who spoke the local Rowzi language. So when you talk about Zimbabwe, don't think about the nation alone. Zimbabwe also means a metropolis of buildings equal in design to the pyramids' cone shape. When the sunlight coming in strikes the altar, the altar shines because of the sunlight. They had a mixture of gold and silver, the exact thing as what happens when you are down at the rock-hewn Temple of Rameses II, which is on November 22nd, when the sun comes in past the doors. It also happens in February. This shows the commonality of the African culture throughout Africa.

Let me address your responce for a few. Truth, however one perceives it...is like LIGHT. If the light is TOO BRIGHT, the people become blinded by it. If it isn't bright enough, they can not see. This is why people metaphorically speaking, were fed with wine instead of water....just as they must digest the soft food before the meat.

Concerning your studies in our story (history)...we shall have to discuss that in length. Somewhere along the way, those of us who have mastered various areas of our story will have to come together to place the puzzle peices on the table to see the picture. In the end, we may find that we're only looking at ourselves once again and remembering what we always knew but forgot.

Good question, do black Jews have white jewish ancestors or are the white jews today descendance of original black jews....
This issues can only be solved by identifying the ethnic identity of the original Jews or Hebrews.

Here is a piece you might find interesting -

My understanding has shown me that Egyptian Civilization is the mother of all civilizations, and Judeo-Christian civilization in particular owe a great deal of its history and beliefs to Egypt. In my opinion Judeo-Christian theologians and Eurocentric historians have deliberately distorted Egyptian role in Judeo- Christian faiths and history as part of their Anti-African racists attitude. I don’t think it is by chance that historians and religious scholars, ignore the African origins of major Western Religions, Judaism and Christianity.

-For example the so called 10 commandments that Moses is supposed to have gotten from God, are actually extracts from the “Negative affirmations of Maat” from Egypt (Kemet), Abraham was not the first man to talk about a monotheistic God but an Egyptian called Akhenaten.

- The teachings of the Nile Valley Africans’ Mysteries System of the Grand Lodge of Luxor taught that “In the beginning was the Word”, this biblical concept was uttered by by the Africans who worshipped the God- RA, AMEN-RA (which you say at the end of every prayer, you are still praying to the African God Amen), PTAH-RA, for thousands upon thousands of years before there was a Hebrew God named YWH (Jehovah). This said teaching is still present in the ‘Egyptian Book of the Dead and the Papyrus of Ani’.

The “Beginning of all Things” in Genesis and the theory of man’s origin is stated in the Egyptian “Book of the coming forth by Day and by Night”, and was at least before the 1st Dynasty (4100 B.C.E), which preceded the arrival of the first non-indigenous invaders of Egypt….the “Hyksos or Shepherd Kings of Beduina”, all of this when Egypt was called “TA-Merry, Kimit, Kamt etc. This was 2825 years before Moses developed his story about Noad and the Great Flood.

One has to be totally fanatically biased not to recognize Moses attempt at detailing the teachings he learnt as an “initiate” in the Mystery System at the Grand Luxor (Thebes). For it would have been impossible for Moses, or anyone else in Egypt at that period, to have raised to one of the highest rank in the government of Pharaoh Rameses II’s inner circle (cabinet) and was not himself in the religious rites of the Mysteries under the priests of the religion of God- Amen-Ra.

About the Exodus story of Moses parting the waters of Red Sea with his rod, there is another similar story of ancient African, much older than than Moses’ story. A king of the Kenda people of Central Africa along the Great Lakes, “…caused the wters of Lake Tanganyika to part when he raised his staff and purposefully dropped it on the ground…” The story goes on to show that when the king and his own soldiers crossed the Waters” of Lake Tanganyika, he once more dropped his “…magical wand..” and “..the waters came together and drowned all of the enemies…”

The 10 commandments came from the ‘Negative Commandments’ which were recited in the ‘Hall of MAAT’ in order to recapture life after death. Creation, Fall, Judgment, Resurrection, Virgin birth of a messiah, trinity- all these stories have African origins. Even some of the so-called “Proverbs of King Solomon” have their origin in the African “Teachings of Amen-Em-Eope”.

For example:

Proverbs xxii : 17, xxiii : 14 (Israel – Asia Minor) –

“1a. Incline thine ear, and hear my words,
And apply thine heart to apprehend; For it is pleasant if thou keep them in thy belly,
That they may be fixed like a peg upon thy lips.”
2a. Have I not written for thee thirty saying …..
3a. Rob not the poor for he is poor, Niether oppress the lowly in the gate.

The Teachings of Amen-em-eope (Egypt –Northeast Alkebu-lan) –

“1. Give thine ear, and hear what I say,
And apply thine heart to apprehend; It is good for thee to place them in thine heart,
Let them rest in the casket of thy belly.
That they may act as a peg upon thy tongue.”
2. Consider these thirty chapters, …..
3. Beware of robbing the poor, And of oppressing the afflicted.

The entire ‘Five Books of Moses’ represent a one-sided report by people who were the “complainants, witnesses, prosecutors, judges, jurors,” and even the only “chosen people of God,” all of them on the side of the so-called “Israelites,”.

Scholars’ Analysis (Including Jewish Scholars)

1. The Secret Origins of the Bible - by Tim Callahan-

“The Bible may contain the greatest story ever told, but as Callahan so brilliantly reveals, the greatest secret of all is that the story is not original. All the major stories in the Bible have historical antecedents that can be traced back to very non-divinely produced works by other cultures in earlier times. This book shakes fundamentalist beliefs about the Bible to the core.”

2. Did Moses really exist and did the Exodus ever take place? - by David Voron (Jewish writer)

Let's start with the prequel to the Exodus, the story of Joseph and hisfamily. Excavations in the eastern delta of the Nile have revealed a gradualincrease in Canaanite pottery, architecture, and tombs, beginning about 1800 B.C, thesefindings are broadly consistent with the tale of Joseph, the visits of his
family to Egypt, and their eventual settlement there.Archaeologists haveidentified the site of Avaris, the Egyptian city of that period that was thecapital of a people known as the Hyskos, a name which translates from the Egyptianas "rulers of foreign land." Inscriptions and seals bearing the names ofHyskos kings indicate that they were Canaanites. Although the Egyptian historianManetho, writing in about 300 B.C. from an Egyptian perspective, asserts thatEgypt was brutally invaded by the Hyskos, archaeologists believe the takeoverwas peaceful. However, the forceful expulsion of the Hyskos as described byManetho is supported by other archaeological and historical sources. The mostreliable evidence, according to Redford, suggests that Pharaoh Ahmose and hisforces attacked and defeated the Hyskos in Avaris, and chased them out of Egyptinto southern Canaan in 1570 B.C.

The Roman-Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, citing Manetho, equates theexpulsion of the Hyskos from Egypt with the Exodus….

TheBook of Exodus states that Hebrew slaves built the city of Pi Ramses ("House ofRamses"). According to Egyptian sources, the city was built during the reignof Ramses II, who ruled 1279-1213 B.C. In other words, the Biblical Exoduswould have had to have taken place 300 years after the expulsion of the Hyskos. Ofcourse there is also no evidence that the Hyskos were ever enslaved--or evenHebrews. Again quoting Abba Eban, "few modern scholars would go so far as toassert that the Hebrews and the Hyskos were the same people." If the Hyskoswere not the Hebrews, what then, is the earliest non-Biblical reference tothis people?

Israel Finkelstein, director of the Institute of Archaeology
at Tel Aviv University, and his colleague Neal Silberman, in their book TheBible Unearthed: "We have no clue, not even a single word, about early Israelitesin Egypt: Neither in monumental inscriptions on walls of temples, nor in tombinscriptions, nor in papyri." Similarly, William Dever, professor of NearEastern archaeology and anthropology at the University of Arizona, states inWho Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come From?: "no Egyptian textever found contains a single reference to 'Hebrews' or 'Israelites' in Egypt,much less to an 'Exodus.'" The ancient Egyptians were such compulsivechroniclers, albeit biased, that it is inconceivable that they would not record anyversion of an event as momentous as the Biblical Exodus. We should at leastexpect some self-serving or biased accounts of this extraordinary event, butthere is absolutely no reference to any exodus of Hebrew slaves in thevoluminous Egyptian writings.

According to Redford, the memories of the Canaanite Hyskos ruling Egypt andsubsequently being driven out (though not enslaved and not Hebrew) most likelyformed the basis for the Exodus story. The sequence of plagues in theExodus may be related to the ancient Egyptian belief that the inability to worshipmultiple gods causes illness. The Amarna tablets indicate that Akhnatenimposed monotheism on polytheistic Egypt during his reign between 1372 and 1354B.C., allegedly causing the populace to suffer a variety of maladies, whichabated with the restoration of polytheism by Akhnaten's successor. JonathanKirsh notes that the basket-in-the-bullrushes infant-Moses story is clearly a"cut-and-paste" plagiarism copied almost verbatim from a Mesopotamian text. In the words of Daniel Lazare, the stories of infant Moses, the plagues,and final exodus are "unconnected folktales," linked together "like pearls on astring." What we have, according to David Denby, is a "self-confirming,self-glorifying myth of origins," with Moses as "the hero of the greatestcampfire story ever told."

3. The Bible And Christianity - The Historical Origins – by Scott Bidstrup

To really understand the Bible and what it intends to say to present generations, it is necessary to understand who wrote it and why, and the cultural context in which it was written. The story is an interesting one, in no small part because the story is so much messier than most of its advocates would have you to believe.

The overriding theme of the Bible storylines is the theme of cultural conquest. Conquest by the Hebrews over their enemy neighbors, culturally by the Jews over the Israelites (used here to mean members of the ten "lost" tribes), the Christians over the Jews, the Catholics over the Gnostics, Marcionites, and other pre-Catholic factions, and on and on. In some cases, the conquest is recorded as a historical, often military event. In others, it merely is recorded as a change in content and context, an alteration of the storyline and outlook and worldview.

The history of Egypt in this period is well documented, there is no evidence from the records of Egypt itself that the events of Exodus ever occurred, either archaeologically or documentarily in the manner in which the Bible describes the events. The reality is that if a series of plagues had been visited upon Egypt, thousands of slaves escaped in a mass runaway, and the army of the Pharaoh were swallowed up by the Red Sea, such events would doubtless have made it into the Egyptian documentary record. But the reality is that there isn't a single word describing any such events.

Instead, what we do have from Egyptian sources is a remarkably different story of the Exodus. From about the beginning of the second millennium B.C.E., through about 1200 B.C.E., Egypt ruled the region known today as Palestine. How do we know this? We know it not only from Egyptian records themselves, which talk about tribute taken from the various towns and cities in Canaan, but from archaeological evidence within the region itself, which shows a number of settlements which were clearly Egyptian military outposts.

So many of the "Hebrews" (culturally indistinct from the Canaanites at this time), who were citizens of Egypt, fled to the Nile delta. time and again. Every time there was a famine in Judah, Israel or Canaan, refugees headed for Egypt. The event was so common, and the refugees so numerous, that they eventually became a substantial minority group, influential in Egypt, where they were known as the Hyksos, as is now very clear from the archaeological record.

The story of the expulsion of the Hyksos is easily the closest parallel we have from either the Egyptian record or the archaeological record to the story of the Exodus as recorded in the Bible. There are problems, though. Besides the Exodus story line, the biggest problem is the dates: the Bible places the Exodus at about 1200 B.C.E., yet the story of the Hyksos culminates in 1570 B.C.E. It is quite likely that the story of the Hyksos is the story that eventually, through generations of revisionistic retelling, became the myth of the Exodus -- another example of history being rewritten to flatter the storytellers rather than to record the unvarnished truth.

Anyway, the Hyksos grew in influence until they eventually took control of Egypt, which they ruled, with considerable cruelty and tyranny during the Fifteenth Dynasty, beginning in 1670 B.C.E. The Egyptians had finally had enough, though, and rebelled against the rule of the Hyksos and drove them out a century later in 1570 B.C.E. They weren't just driven out, either; the Egyptians pushed them back into Canaan with considerable force, driving them all the way to the Syrian frontier, sacking and burning Canaanite cities along the way. Sometime later, the Hyksos capital in Egypt, Avaris, in the eastern Nile delta, was razed to the ground by the Pharoah Ahmose, who chased the last remnants of the Hyksos back into Canaan and even laid siege to Sharuhen, the main Canaanite citadel, destroying it and ending Canaanite influence there. At least one historian claims (a millennium after the fact) that the Hyksos refugees settled in Jerusalem and built a temple there, but the archaeological record does not support the claim of either a temple or large numbers of refugees in Jerusalem from this period.

It is quite clear from the archaeological record, as well, that there never was a "wandering in the desert for 40 years," either. Extensive archaeological surveys of the Sanai desert have never shown any encampments dating from the time of the Exodus, either before, during or after the time of the Ramsean pharoahs. At least two sites mentioned in the exodus story have been positively identified and carefully and extensively excavated, but no evidence of late bronze-age occupation or encampment has been found at either site. Additionally, the Sanai Desert was literally dotted with Egyptian military outposts, and nowhere in the Sanai could the Hebrews have been more than a day's travel from one of them. It is inconceivable that they could have remained undetected in the Sanai for forty years. The story of the Exodus is clearly mythmaking designed to portray a possible forced expulsion of oppressors as an escape of victims.

By the 12th century B.C.E., the Hebrews assumed an identity unique enough in the archaeological record to become discernible for the first time. In the mountains and plateaus of the northern highlands of Canaan, from Jerusalem north to the Jezreel Valley, the highland settlements, poor for their day, begin to show a single distinguishing feature from other, similar highland settlements in regions around them. There is little to go on - pottery shows an impoverished lifestyle, with little decoration and use other than as storage and cooking vessels. Yet one thing is clear - the bones of pigs become absent from the archaeological record. The prohibition on eating pork is therefore the oldest archaeologically supported feature of Jewish culture. It is representative of the beginnings of the transformation of the god "El" into "El-ohim," the god of gods, the god of Israel. http://www.bidstrup.com/bible.htm

4. WERE THERE HEBREW PHARAOHS OF EGYPT?-

The Bible: - I was to find in my studies that the sacred books that make up the anthology modern scholars call the Hebrew Bible - and Christians call the Old Testament - developed over roughly a millennium; the oldest texts appear to come from the eleventh or tenth centuries BCE. The Hebrew Bible, written over a period of more than 500 years, consists of many types of literature and reflects varying points of view. The Bible has undergone substantial changes with regard to its early manuscripts and their translated versions. This Book is a collection of various materials and the worst part is the crude 'editing' where the joints are much in evidence. Gathering and the codification, giving the final written form, of the Books of the Bible took centuries. It uses descriptive methods. Its language is abstract, very rich in images. The smallest or shortest of reports turns into a story in the Bible, full of puzzling descriptions whose ambiguity is intentional. There's no getting away from the fact that the Bible is a very human book. It was not written by God, it was not edited by God, it was not translated by God. In the beginning it wasn't written down at all. Most parts of the Bible started life as sayings or stories that were handed down from generation to generation as part of an oral tradition and doubtless became altered, adulterated, and embellished in the process. Eventually they got written down, which tended to fix them a bit more, but before the invention of printing they were handed on by being copied out, and inevitably mistakes were made. And when they were translated from the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, they suffered still further alteration because translation can never be exact. Yet the Bible is essentially a religious book, but, unlike most ancient religious books, the Old Testament is characterized by a strong sense of history; even laws and exhortations are woven into the narratives.

The David and Solomon eras are periods curiously missing from the archaeological record of the region where one should expect to find archeological evidence as to its existence! Quoting from the book, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, "The Bible is the only written source concerning the United Monarchy, and it is therefore the basis of any historical presentation of the period" (Mazar, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, 369). There is such a complete void of external sources that the archaeologist, author and leading authority on the era, Donald Redford, writes in frustration that "such topics as the foreign policy of David and Solomon, Solomon's trade in horses or his marriage to Pharaoh's daughter must remain themes for midrash and fictional treatment" (Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times, 310).

Answer for yourself: Don't you find it rather interesting and a matter of concern that archaeology has confirmed the reigns of all other great kings of the ancient world mentioned in the Bible, and some of the later, lesser kings of of Judah and Israel (namely, Omri, Ahab, Jehu, Pekah, Hosea, Ahaz, Hezekiah, Mannasseh, and Uzziah) but cannot confirm the Kingship of David or Solomon?

Of course when questioned about this inconsistency typical Christian and Jewish responses vary around the conservative response that it is only a matter of time before concrete evidence of the reigns of David and Solomon will be found as well.

I am here to inform the reader that such evidence does already exits but as you will find it won't be found in Palestine but in Egypt and in a different era. Concrete evidence for David and Solomon already exists, and comes from the very place one would least expect to find it; namely Egypt. Of course we don't find the names "David" or "Solomon" but we do find the same exploits described in the Hebrew texts accredited to Thutmose III and Amenhotep III. Now we will find that that neither this "King David" or "King Solomon" were Hebrews for they were Egyptian Pharoahs but the son of this "King Solomon/Amenhotep III" with the daugher of Joseph (Tiye) will have Hebrew blood in him. This son will later be Pharoah of Egypt and lead this great Exodus. We will see that in time.

Our study will be begin with the examination of King David and progress until we are centered on the very important 18th dynasty of Egypt. At the end of the 18th dynasty (after Hatshepsut and 4 other pharaohs) there reigned a strange pharaoh named Amenophis IV, who later called himself Akhenaten. Amenhotep IV was a pharaoh so revolutionary, so radical that those following him had his name which he changed to Akhenaten and face deleted from the Egyptian records so completely that only 3000 years later did archaeology rediscover his new royal capital at Akhet-Aten (modern el-Amarna). The story of Akhenaten is all through the first five books in the Jewish-Christian Bible but due to revisionism we don't recognize him. He is the Biblical Moses and I will present evidence to show that this is a fact. This amazing and courageous Pharaoh worshipped only one god whom he called Aten (the sun disk), and founded a new capital, Akhet-Aten (Horizon of Aten), today called Tell el Amarna. This period is called the Amarna period in Egyptian history. Countless books have been written about Akhenaten but few have put together key pieces of Egyptian and Biblical History together correctly as I hope to reveal to the reader. Of course the point of such study is to see the unbelievable knowledge that Egypt possessed about the God of the Cosmos and their unique and deep understanding of this God and his workings in the Cosmos and its ultimate meaning for mankind. At the same time we will focus upon the efforts of Akhenaton, the Biblical Moses, to bring a religious revolution to bear on his nation who had at his time fallen into the deception of the worship of the "God-man" Osiris which is so similar to the same sin of idolatry which is attached to the worship of the Christian God-man Jesus Christ. The startling ramifications of such a deception, both back then and now, will become evident the more we study. At the crux of this whole study is the growing understanding and revelation that if Moses, the Egyptian Akhenaton, lived today he would oppose such worship of the post-Nicean "God-man" Jesus created by Rome.

It did not take me long to recognize the more I studied Egyptian history and religion that there exists a unique link and relationship between Akhenaten's monotheism and Jewish monotheism that does not exist in Christianity. There had to be a link between the two and my efforts at continued in-depth study revealed to me in time this very important connection between the Egyptian Pharaohs and the Biblical Patriarchs and later Jewish leaders like King David and King Solomon

TRACING THE HEBREW PHARAOHS OF EGYPT...WHO WAS THIS KING SOLOMON?
In article #2 dealing with the Biblical King David we saw a preponderance of evidence that teaches us that King David of the Old Testament is the historical Pharaoh Thutmose III.

Answer for yourself: If King David is to be properly identified as an adaptation of the Pharaoh Thutmose III, then should we not expect that from through his loins, one way or the other, would come one whom we know today as King Solomon? Should we expect that he should also be a Pharaoh and also be found in Egypt?

Our study will focus on the most important Pharaohs of the 18th dynasty:

Ahmose
Amenhotep I
Thutmose I
Thutmose II
Hatshepsut
Thutmose III (King David)
Amenhotep II
Thutmose IV
Amenhotep III (King Solomon)
Amenhotep IV (Akhenaten-Moses)
Neferneferuaten
Tutankhamen
Ay
Horemheb
Answer for yourself: Did you notice that out beside three names of these 18th Dynasty Pharaohs are the more familiar Biblical names of familiar Jewish heroes and Kings? What could we possibly mean by that? Have we lost our mind at Bet Emet Ministries? Are we insinuating that the real identities of these Biblical characters are possibly Egyptian Pharaohs? Yes that is exactly what we are saying and we have the evidence to prove such an identification as you will see if you continue to study.

You should have noticed one other thing that is quite startling considering what we have been taught by the Old Testament. It must be said at the beginning that the chronology of the Bible represents Solomon as the son of King David. However when we get to Egypt we see that the Biblical chronology is questionable due to highly detailed and accurate Egyptian records and as you study you will see this for yourself. As our study progresses and the evidence mounts that the King Solomon of the Bible is in reality Amenhotep III; the great-grandson of King David (Tuthmose III). We will also begin to notice that unlike what we have led to believe; for example, that King Solomon is the son of King David, such is not the truth. We will find that King Solomon is not the son but rather the great-grandson of Tuthmose III (King David of the Bible).

Answer for yourself: So what is the truth? Well let us doour study and examine the historical evidence and and assorted historical facts we find outside the Old Testament and then you will see quite clearly which is true and let me give you a hint...it is not the Biblical account. Now on with the study. What we will find is that by marrying Tiye, the daughter of Yuya (the Biblical Joseph) and his wife who was the daughter of the priest of Heliopolis, we see that Tiye was half Hebrew. Amenhotep III, the Biblical King Solomon, by marrying Tiye thus "re-establishes the connection of the Jews with the Egyptian line when Sarah and Abraham has left Egypt and when Sarah gave birth to Isaac, the son of Tuthmose III (the Biblical King David). Tiye's father, Yuya, the Biblical Joseph, had been commander of the chariotry under Tuthmose IV (Cyril Aldred, Cyril, Akhenaten: King of Egypt, 1987). Tiye's features and dark skin as represented in artwork from the time indicate African origins and attest to the the racial color of the Egyptians whom the Biblical Joseph marries. This begins the "black skinned" Jewish race which many historians are amiss to attest. To inherit the throne, however, Amenhotep III (the Biblical Solomon) had to have a royal Egyptian wife. Thus he also marries his sister Sitamun, (thus explaining the Bible's reference to his marrying an Egyptian princess, whereas as King of Israel, it would have been impossible). By Amenhotep III, Tiye had at least six children. She had two sons (Tuthmose V and Amenhotep IV, the secondof whom went on to become pharaoh and is better known today as the Biblical Moses. Let us not forget that Tiye, as seen in the above picture with her husband Amenhotep III (the Biblical Solomon) was a girl of common birth from her Hebrew father Joseph (Yuya) but yet history records here as a person of very strong character. Evident from records, she was a beautiful young Black queen. A woman of great intellect, ability, and a powerful influence. She shared the crown with her husband Amenhotep III (the Biblical Solomon) as though she had been its lineal heiress. Queen Tiye had such an important part in the affairs of Egypt, that foreign diplomats often appealed directly to her in matters affecting certain international relations. Make no mistake about it; Queen Tiye was a full-blooded African. Her son, Akhenaton (the Biblical Moses) and his wife, Nefertiti are the parents of King Tutankhamen, who is also known as "King Tut." From Akhenaton on down to the end of the 18 Dynasty we find the Hebrew Pharaohs that came from the marriage of Amenhotep III and the daughter of Joseph:

Akhenaton (the Biblical Moses)
Smenkhkare (the brother of Moses)
Tutankhamen (the son of Moses)
Ay (the Biblical Ephraim)
The Hebrew Old Testament contains a lot of information about King Solomon. Much of it is true and some is not. In the Hebrew Scriptures it is said of King Solomon:

Solomon inherited a enormous empire conquered by his father King David that extended from the Nile in Egypt to the Euphrates River in Mesopotamia;
I Kings 4:21 21 And Solomon reigned over all kingdoms from the river unto the land of the Philistines, and unto the border of Egypt: they brought presents, and served Solomon all the days of his life. (KJV)

Answer for yourself: If we can prove that King Solomon is a Pharaoh then what does that say about about the same promise made earlier to the Hebrew "Patriarchs"; for example the one which we find in Gen 15:18 which was made to Abraham?

Gen. 15: 18 18 In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates: (KJV)

Answer for yourself: Could Abraham have been a Pharaoh and we not know it? Would this explain why Josephus writes that Abraham had 318 "officers" indicating an vast army of legions when the inherited Hebrew Texts given us by Ezra says "318 servants"? Did Ezra cover this up? I again refer you to article #2 to begin to see the truth about Ezra. Now let us look at more of the "same" promises in the Hebrew Texts and to "whom" they were made.

Deut 1:6-7 6 The LORD our God spake unto us in Horeb, saying, Ye have dwelt long enough in this mount: 7 Turn you, and take your journey, and go to the mount of the Amorites, and unto all the places nigh thereunto, in the plain, in the hills, and in the vale, and in the south, and by the sea side, to the land of the Canaanites, and unto Lebanon, unto the great river, the river Euphrates. (KJV)

Answer for yourself: Where did Moses get the authority to promise this land which was owned by Egypt to these "fleeing" Hebrews? Could it have been that Moses was a Pharaoh and we not know it?

Josh 1:1-4 1 Now after the death of Moses the servant of the LORD it came to pass, that the LORD spake unto Joshua the son of Nun, Moses' minister, saying, 2 Moses my servant is dead; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel. 3 Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, that have I given unto you, as I said unto Moses. 4 From the wilderness and this Lebanon even unto the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites, and unto the great sea toward the going down of the sun, shall be your coast. (KJV)

Answer for yourself: Where did Joshua get the authority to promise this land which was owned by Egypt to these "fleeing" Hebrews? Could it have been that Joshua also was a Pharaoh and we not know it?

2 Sam 8:1-3 1 And after this it came to pass, that David smote the Philistines, and subdued them: and David took Metheg'ammah out of the hand of the Philistines. 2 And he smote Moab, and measured them with a line, casting them down to the ground; even with two lines measured he to put to death, and with one full line to keep alive. And so the Moabites became David's servants, and brought gifts. 3 David smote also Hadadezer, the son of Rehob, king of Zobah, as he went to recover his border at the river Euphrates. (KJV)

Answer for yourself: Where did King David get the ownership of this Egyptian land? Could King David have been a Pharaoh? Well we saw that he was in article #2. That determination is not hard for you now once reading article #2. We will deal with these other Patriarchs in future articles. Now let us get back to Solomon.

The Hebrew Scriptures teach us that King Solomon accumulated great wealth and wisdom.

23 So king Solomon exceeded all the kings of the earth in riches and in wisdom. (1917 Tanakh)

The Hebrew Scriptures teach us that King Solomon administered his kingdom through a system of 12 districts (1 Kings 4:7).
7 And Solomon had twelve officers over all Israel, who provided victuals for the king and his household: each man had to make provision for a month in the year.

The Hebrew Scriptures teach us that King Solomon possessed a large harem, which included "the daughter of Pharaoh"
1 ¶ And Solomon became allied to Pharaoh king of Egypt by marriage, and took Pharaoh's daughter, and brought her into the city of David, until he had made an end of building his own house, and the house of the LORD, and the wall of Jerusalem round about (I Kings 3:1)

1 ¶ Now king Solomon loved many foreign women, besides the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites; (I Kings. 11:1)

3 And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines; and his wives turned away his heart. (I Kings 11:3)

The Hebrew Scriptures teach us that King Solomon honored other gods in his old age:
4 For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods; and his heart was not whole with the LORD his God, as was the heart of David his father. 5 For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, and after Milcom the detestation of the Ammonites. (I Kings 11:4-5).

The Hebrew Scriptures teach us that King Solomon was a master builder who created buildings of royal proportions like the Egyptians. He built "the house of the Lord, and his own house as we know. devoted his reign to great building projects;
15 ¶ And this is the account of the levy which king Solomon raised; to build the house of the LORD, and his own house, and Millo, and the wall of Jerusalem, and Hazor, and Megiddo, and Gezer. (1 Kings 9:15).

17 And Solomon built Gezer, and Beth-horon the nether, 18 and Baalath, and Tadmor in the wilderness, in the land, 19 and all the store-cities that Solomon had, and the cities for his chariots, and the cities for his horsemen, and that which Solomon desired to build for his pleasure in Jerusalem, and in Lebanon, and in all the land of his dominion. (I Kings 9:17-19).

Answer for yourself: What were some of these building accomplishments:

The Temple (I Kings 6)
The Royal Palace (I Kings 7:2-12)
The walls of Jerusalem
The millo (an eastern fill made to enlarge Jerusalem (I Kings 11:27)
The Royal Cities of Megiddo, Hazor, and Gezer,
Many garrisons and fortifications
The store cities, the cities for his horsemen and the cities for his chariots throughout his empire.
I must address the building of the Temple. Amenhotep III, the Biblical Solomon, embarked on massive building campaigns which are partly confirmed in the list in I Kings but there is a problem. This temple was built in the 14th century B.C.E. and not in the 10th century as the Bible states. The problem we find is that the palace he is supposed to have built in Jerusalem cannot be found by archeologists, but the description tallies exactly with the Amenhotep III's palace in Thebes which was built in the 14th century.

Also of importance is the fact that Amenhotep III is responsible for what we call the "12 Tribes" of Israel. Let me explain. It was he who organized Egypt into twelve administrative districts ("12 tribes"); the organization which was taken from the pattern of the Zodiac.

Answer for yourself: In reading a book entitled Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times by Redford he asks a good question so let me paraphrase it: Since archeology and history testifies to a pattern where other great Bronze and Iron Age cultures in the ancient Near East (Egyptian, Babylonian, Assyrian, and Hittite) left as a legacy numerous documents, art, and inscriptions on buildings or public monuments would should we not expect to have such testimony left by such a great king and master builder let alone by the descendants and admirers of King Solomon in order to honor him? Of course we would expect this to occur yet the hard facts of archeology and history hits us right between the eyes. No article of any king bearing the name of "King Solomon" has ever been found as of today (Ibid. p. 309) anywhere!

The cities of Hazor, Megiddo and Gezer, which as we have seen were built by King Solomon, have now been extensively excavated and all artifacts discovered examined and categorized. Hazor was a large Canaanite city state in Upper Galilee and has been identified as modern Tell el-Qedah only 14 kilometers north of the Sea of Galilee. It was one of the major commercial centres in the Fertile Cresent and we find references to it in both Egyptian and Mesopotamian texts going as far back as the eighteenth century B.C.E. Megiddo, which has been identified as modern Tell el-Mutesellim, was the largest of he ancient fortified city states in Canaan, overlooking the Jezreel Valley of Central Palestine, while Gezar, located in the foothills of the Judean Rang east of Jerusalem, was another important fortified city. A stratum containing large palaces, temples and strong fortifications was found in each of these cities. The name of Solomon, however, was not found.

Answer for yourself: Are you aware that all three of these cities were conquered by Tuthmose III (King David) in the middle of the fifteenth century B.C.E.? This has been confirmed by archeological digging , which has produced evidence of the cities' destruction in the right strata for this period (Osman, The House of the Messiah, p. 212).

Answer for yourself: Now since King Solomon is King David's grandson, and we know that King David is really Thutmose III, then should we not expect to find compelling evidence and parallels between the lives of the Biblical King Solomon and Thutmose III's grandson named Amenhotep III? We should and we do.

Answer for yourself: Are you aware that in all three cases evidence has been found of large-scale reconstruction work 50 years later during the reign of Amenhotep III (the Biblical Solomon) who was Tuthmose III's (David's) grandson?

Answer for yourself: Can you guess what of earth shattering proportions was also found in the excavations of these three cities? A cartouche containing the name not of Solomon but Amenhotep III. A Cartouche is an oval band symbolizing continuity which enclosed a god’s or Pharaoh’s name (nomen and prenomen) similar to a modern logo, and which was the symbol of an Egyptian name in hieroglyphics. A cartouche of the 18th Dynasty Pharaoh Amenhotep III, Thutmose III's grandson (King David) was found in the strata belonging to this period and nothing was found indicating a "King Solomon" had been connected with any of these 3 cities in any way whatsoever. (Osman, House of the Messiah, p. 212).

In Jerusalem, it has not been possible to excavate the temple mount, however, extensive excavations in the city, including the areas adjacent to the temple mount have not revealed the existence of a Solomaic palace complex (Osman, The House of the Messiah, p. 216). Moreover, excavation of the Millo has revealed (due to pottery found in the Millo) that its original construction was also contemporary with the Egyptian 18th Dynasty of Amenhotep III (Osman, House of the Messiah, p. 200-201; Rohl, Pharaohs and Kings, p. 181).

Amenhotep III of Egypt, Pharaoh of the Egypt's glorious 18th Dynasty, was known in ancient times as the "King of Kings" and "Ruler of Ruler's" (Redford, Akhenaten the Heretic King, p. 35). He, like the Biblical Solomon, inherited a vast empire whose influence extended quite literally from the Nile to the Euphrates (Osman, House of Messiah, p. 202). http://www.egyptcx.netfirms.com/were_there_hebrew_pharaohs_egypt_3.htm

Ancient Egypt, Nubia and the Jews

The present ethnic identity of Egypt doesn’t reflect or have anything to do with the original inhabitants of Egypt (Kemet) as much as today’s Americans reflect the ethnic identity of the original land now called America. To understand Ancient Egypt formerly called Kemet, one has to understand ancient Ethiopia and ancient Nubia because these three were interconnected.

Around 5,100 years ago, a rich and powerful nation called the kingdom of Kush (also referred to as ancient Nubia) was a center of culture and military might in Africa. Ancient Nubia had a wealth of natural resources such as gold, ivory, copper, frankincense and ebony but they also produced and traded a variety of goods such as pottery.

Ancient Nubia's lands are now part of modern Egypt and Sudan. Nubia is the homeland of Africa's earliest black culture with a history which can be traced from 3800 B.C.

The influx of Arabs to Egypt and Sudan had contributed to the suppression of the Nubian identity following the collapse of the last Nubian kingdom in 1900. A major part of the Nubian population were totally arabized or claimed to be arabs (Jaa'leen-the majority of Northern Sudanese- and some Donglawes in Sudan, Kenuz and Koreskos in Egypt). However all Nubians were converted to Islam, and Arabic language became their main media of communication in addition to their indigenous old Nubian language. The unique characteristic of Nubian is shown in their culture (dress, dances, traditions and music) as well as their indigenous language which is the common feature of all Nubians.

So it isn't because when you go to Egypt you will notice that the ancient Egyptians are shown by the artist as the ancient Nubians or Ethiopians or anybody else, except when you are talking about the conquerors. In most of these museums they purposely bring you the statues of the Greeks, of the Romans, of the Persians, the Assyrians, and the Hyksos. They don't bring you any of the Africans. So when they can't help it, and they need to bring you one that you call a typical African like Pharaoh Mentuhotep III, it is important to Egypt that they have to show him. What they did was to make his nose flat, so you can’t tell the difference.

Remember, the period of time of which we are speaking, there is no writing in Greece yet. Until Homer there is no writing in Greece. No record you could deal with. Whatever they learned, came from outside, came from Egypt, came from Babylonia. The Babylonian writings are part of this origin of Greece as well as the writings from at least 4100 B.C.E., the First Dynastic period, and this is not when writing started along the Nile. This is the First Dynasty, when Egypt reorganized herself from under two men. The war between the north, headed by King Scorpion, and the south headed by King Narmer, and that will bring us to about 4100 B.C.E. when Narmer started United or Dynastic Egypt.

So the pre-dynastic period was the period of the introduction of religion, of mathematics and science, engineering, law, medicine and so forth. The period of documentation also started then to some extent in the First Dynasty. The period of belief in "One God" really did not start with Akhnaten, that is, when somebody said there must be only "One God." But the period of absorbing "One God" didn't start then, because it is that period in 4100 B.C.E., when Narmer, after defeating Scorpion, the leader of the North, decided that the deity of the North, God Amen (which you say at the end of every prayer, you are still praying to the African God Amen), be put together with his own deity of the South, God Ra. But they didn't notice that he made "One God' out of the two, God Amen-Ra. He used them in that respect. But the people fell into civil war and there was division again. From that union, God Amen-Ra became God Ptah, and the Goddess of Justice became Maat. Justice, shown as a scale which is the same symbol now used in the United States for justice, except that there is no justice in the United States, because one scale is up, the other is down, and that is not justice; that is "just this"! Justice is when both scales are on the same level, and so the African in America who asks for justice is being foolish. The symbol says you will never get it; you'll get "just this"!

Before these symbols came the laws on morality and human behavior, the Admonitions to Goddess Maat—Goddess of Justice and Law. There were forty-two Admonitions to Goddess Maat forming the foundation of justice. Then there are the teachings of Amen-em-eope one thousand years before Solomon stole them, some of which he plagiarized word for word, and others he paraphrased, which are now called the Proverbs of Solomon. And yet if we could have stopped there we would have done enough. But it wasn't the last of it, so to speak. Because we came down with jurisprudence, the basis of law attached to the deity which we are teaching now as jurisprudence. And there is a thing in the African jurisprudence that a harborer should not get away from the penalty of the thief.

During the earliest time of the Kingdom of Ethiopia, King Uri, the first King of Ethiopia had spoken about, "justice isn't based upon strength, but on morality of the condition of the event." This now interprets as "the stronger should not mistreat the weaker"; and this is supposed to be something said by Plato, just like the nonsense we hear that "the Greeks had democracy." The Greeks have never democracy. They never had one in the past and they don't have it now. When they were supposed to have had democracy in Greece no more than five percent of the people had anything you could call democracy. When you look at that, you find it was from this background going back to the time of Amen-em-eope that theses fundamental laws came from, you could see why those laws spread from North Africa and into Numidia, which is today called Tunisia.

It is at Numidia then that Augustine's family, continuing the practice of the Manichean religion, carried it into Rome later in the Christian Era. When he left his education in Khart-Haddas or Carthage, it is that same teaching from the Manicheans that Augustine carried into Rome. Ambrose, the greatest Christian scholar in all of Europe, became stunned. But when this twenty-nine-year-old boy arrived and spoke to Ambrose about his education in Carthage, Ambrose said, "Man, you're heavy." And Augustine took over. It was the same teachings that Guido the Monk, who went to Spain in the time of the Moors, had taught at the University of Salamanca which they had established. And it was the same Manichean concept that made Augustine write against the Stoics. Augustine wrote the fundamental principle that was to govern modern Christianity in its morality, when he presented them with a book called On Christian Doctrine. He had previously written the Holy City of God. If you want to check Augustine to see if he was an indigenous African read his Confessions. There he will tell you who he was.

When Islam came it was supposed to bring something new, but I ask "what did it bring new?" Because Islam was supposed to have started with an African woman by the name Hagar, according to Islamic literature. Hagar was from Egypt, and Abraham was from Asia—the City of Ur in Chaldea. At the time of Abraham's birth a group of African people, called Elamites, were ruling. Before Abraham, the sacred river of India has been named after General Ganges, an African who came from Ethiopia. The River Ganges still carries the name of General Ganges. And I notice in India they haven't given up the symbolic worship of the cow, which represents the Worship of Goddess Het-Heru, Hathor, the "Golden Calf" of the Jews. They also haven't given up the obelisk that still stays there, which the Hindus copied. Again came an Englishman by the name of Sir Geoffrey Higgins, who published a two-volume work in 1836, and in Volume One in particular, he is speaking about all the deities of the past being "black," but said: "I can't accept that they could have come from even Egypt, they must have come from India." He couldn't accept it!

Out of that religion of the Nile Valley came the Religion of Ngail in Kenya from the same river base. And as the situation changed you had the Amazulu going for it, because the Zimbabwe river is still there. The people who were originally there were kicked off their land by the British, and equally by the Germans. When the German Dr. Carl Peters came there, the struggle between the Germans and the English for Tanganyika was going strong; both sides killed off the people around that area who spoke the local Rowzi language. So when you talk about Zimbabwe, don't think about the nation alone. Zimbabwe also means a metropolis of buildings equal in design to the pyramids' cone shape. When the sunlight coming in strikes the altar, the altar shines because of the sunlight. They had a mixture of gold and silver, the exact thing as what happens when you are down at the rock-hewn Temple of Rameses II, which is on November 22nd, when the sun comes in past the doors. It also happens in February. This shows the commonality of the African culture throughout Africa.

Peace.

Click to expand...

Peace brotha,

I appreciate the discourse, as I'm thoroughly aware of the information you've posted here, but my question was in reference to authors of the links, are the authors of the links white Jews?

I appreciate the discourse, as I'm thoroughly aware of the information you've posted here, but my question was in reference to authors of the links, are the authors of the links white Jews?

Click to expand...

I dont know if the authors are white Jews, I wont be suprised if they are because we usually let other people write our own history in this way they can distort it, our scholars are now rewriting our history but we as a collective are not very diligent on keeping detailed records of events.
I will make a further research to see who wrote what.